

MM5 




003 063 370 2 



Conservation Resources 
Llg-Free» Type I 
Ph 8.5. Buffered 






Plan of Reforestation: 

[Extract from Thirteenth Annual Report of the Forestry Commission of Minnesota.] , 

The pine forests of Minnesota have been logged sixty 
years and most of the timber has been shipped out of the 
State. In a few more years the original pine will be gone. 
Already thirty thousand car loads of forest products are 
brought into Minnesota annually from the Pacific coast. 

The population of the United States since its first 
settlement has increased at the average rate of i8 per 
cent every ten years, and in eighty years will reach the 
amazing number of 320,000,000! Forest products will be 
in much greater demand then than now. If we neglect 
suitable measures of reforestation our posterity will be 
ashamed of us. 

Forestry is not an expenditure. It is a savings bank 
investment. The great thing in forestry is that it utihzes 
third and fourth rate — sandy, hilly and rocky — land that 
is unfit for agriculture. The yield tables of Germany 
show that an acre of such land planted as part of a forest, 
with pine, on forestry principles — seedling trees two or 
three years old, planted at an average distance apart of 
four or five feet, it being necessary to have forest crowded 
when young to promote height growth — will in eighty 
years produce i8,oo5"feet board measure. The surviving 
trees — for the greater number would have died out — 
would be from 12 to 15 inches in diameter breast high. 
They would continue, if left standing, to gn3w many years 
after they had reached the age of eighty years, but not at 
a rate to earn good interest. 

If the State this year planted 37,500 acres of forestry 
land in the same way, and continued to do as much every 
year for eighty years, it would then have a normal forest 
of 3,000,000 acres — not in one body but in scattered 
localities — of the value of probably $200,000,000, yielding 

1 



:\ 



a net revenue of 3 per cent per annum. From the 37, 500 
acres planted this year there could then be cut 675,000,000 
feet board measure of logs and the same amount every 
year thereafter perpetually. Under forestry management 
a larger percentage of the cut-over area would become re- 
forested by natural seeding than is the case under present 
methods of logging (now only about 5 per cent of cut-over 
land becomes well stocked with pine from natural seed- 
ing), the blank spaces would be promptly replanted and 
a sustained yield secured. 

If the State had 37,500 acres of third or fourth rate 
land to plant with forest we would find that on an average 
5 per cent of it was already well stocked with pine or 
some other valuable timber, and that another 5 per cent 
of the area was rock or water, which we would call blank 
spaces; deducting this 10 per cent from 37,500 would 
leave 33,750 acres to be actually planted. In other 
words, for every 1,000 acres of third or fourth rate land 
only 900 acres on an average would have to be planted. 

In planting about 200 acres substantially in the way 
above mentioned the State has found that two men can 
plant one acre a day, the whole cost, exclusive of land, 
being about $6.00 per acre. To plant 37,500 acres each 
spring would require 2,500 employes thirty days. Al- 
though some thousands of men will for a few years be 
coming out of the logging camps every spring, some of 
whom could be employed in planting, and although the 
planting would be done in half a dozen or more counties, 
still it is not likely the State could for a number of years 
plant 37,500 acres annually. The State should not 
undertake to do any more than it can do economically 
and well. It should, however, engage in the work with 
energy. 

Prussia plants and sows 45,000 acres of state forest 
annually. The other German states in the aggregate 
plant more. 

,, 2 



<^J I believe the State will be able to purchase forestry 

land at an average price of not exceeding $2.50 per acre, 
but as the State has some school land that is only fit for 
forestry, but which according to the constitution must be 
offered for sale at not less than $5.00 per acre, authority 
should be granted for paying $5.00 per acre when 
necessary. 

The ordinary revenue is not sufficient to permit the 
legislature to appropriate money enough to carry into 
effect a plan of reforestation as extensive as the above. 
To accomplish this there should be an additional tax of 
three-tenths of one mill on all taxable property in the 
State, being only thirty cents on each thousand dollars. 
This would raise about 1300,000 annually and be sufficient 
to carry the plan into effect. That the plan may be per- 
manent it should be authorized by a constitutional amend- 
ment such as herewith proposed. That it may not seem 
extravagant let me mention that for forestry Pennsylvania 
appropriates annually $400,000 and New York 1550,000. 

If the next legislature were to submit the amendment 
it could not be voted on until the general election in 191 1, 
and if adopted no money would be available under it 
sooner than 191 3. 

Few states have the natural resources to undertake such 
a system of reforestation. Minnesota's natural advan- 
tages admit of her doing it. If she has the public spirit 
to undertake it she would at once be in the front rank, if 
not the leader, of all the American States in reforestation. 



Proposed Constitutional Amendment. 



To secure a sustained yield of timber for the use 
of the people of this State the proper officers shall 
annually levy and collect a tax of three=tenths of 
one mill on each dollar of the taxable property 
within this State, the proceeds of which shall be 
used for the purchase of land for the State adapted 
for forest at not over $5.00 per acre, and for the 
production and maintenance thereon of forest 
according to forestry principles. Unexpended 
balances shall not lapse but constitute a fund for 
forestry purposes. The timber produced thereon 
shall be sold at a fair valuation and the revenue 
therefrom be paid into the State treasury, except 
that one quarter of the net revenue shall be paid 
to the towns in which the land is situated, in aid 
of public schools and roads. Should any tract 
acquired be found better adapted for any other 
purpose than the production of timber, it may be 
sold or leased and the proceeds used for acquiring 
or developing forestry land. Until otherwise 
directed by the legislature, which may supplement 
these provisions with necessary enactments, the 
State Forestry Board shall draw and disburse the 
money hereby provided and purchase, manage and 
control the lands and forests. No money shall be 
paid for any tract until the attorney general shall 
certify to the validity of the title. It shall be com= 
petent for two successive regular legislatures, by 
a two=thirds vote of each house, to alter or repeal 
any of these provisions. 



4 



LETTERS FROM VARIOUS CITIZENS OF MINNESOTA APPROVING 

THE FOREGOING PLAN OF REFORESTATION, IN THE 

ORDER OF THEIR DATE. 

(From Mr. J. M. Underwood, experienced nurseryman and 
formerly President of the State Horticultural Society.) 

Lake City, Minn., Jan. 22, 1908. 
Gen. C. C. Andrews, 

St. Paul, Minn. 
Dear Sir: 

I have just read over the plan you recommend for reforesta- 
tion. You certainly have put the subject in a logical and conclu- 
sive manner, and I heartily endorse the proposed constitutional 
amendment. There is nothing of greater importance to our State 
and country than of promoting moisture in our climate and retain- 
ing it, and in no way can it be done except by reforesting our cut- 
over forests and adding to them. Commending you for your 
efficient service in this work, I am, 

Very truly yours, 

J. M. UNDERWOOD. 



(From Hon. S. G. Comstock, ex-Member of Congress.) 

MooRHEAD, Minn., Jan. 22, 1908. 
Hon. C. C. Andrews, 

Forestry Commissioner, 

St, Paul, Minn. 
Dear General: 

I have read with much interest your plan of reforestation. 
The need for some energetic action in that line is apparent to all 
familiar with the facts. I have heard no plan so feasible and 
practical as the one you outline. In my judgment the State will 
do well to adopt and put in early execution your recommendations. 

Very sincerely yours, 

S. G. COMSTOCK. 



(From Mr. J. H. Beek, Secretary St. Paul Jobbers' and Manufac- 
turers' Association.) 

St. Paul, Minn., Jan. 22, 1908. 
Gen. C. C. Andrews, 

Forestry Commissioner, 

State Capitol, City. 
Dear Sir: 

I have very carefully thought over your plan of reforestation 
as outlined in your letter of January 14th, and I am heartily in 
favor of it. Unless the State of Minnesota enters upon some 
comprehensive plan of reforestation and pursues it continuously 
the time is not far distant when the people will realize how costly 
has been the indifference and shortsightedness of our lawmakers. 

Yours truly, 
J. H. BEEK. 

(From General C. McC. Reeve.) 

Minneapolis, Minn., Jan. 22, 1908. 
General C. C. Andrews, 

St. Paul, Minn. 
My Dear General: 

I have examined carefully your plan of reforestation and I 
certainly approve most heartily of it. To my mind no one ques- 
tion is deserving of more prompt and intelligent action on the 
part of the proper authorities than the question of providing an 
adequate timber supply for future generations. 

Yours very truly, 
C. McC. REEVE. 

(From Mr, Daniel R. Noyes.) 

St. Paul, Minn., Jan. 23, 1908. 
Hon. C. C. Andrews, 

Forestry Commissioner, 

St. Paul, Minn. 
Dear Sir: 

Your favor of Jan. 20 received. I am heartily in favor of 
the plan proposed to "secure a sustained yield of timber" in this 
State. The matter of "reforestation" is one of great importance 
to Minnesota, and some practical plan of reforestation is of the 
utmost importance to our State, and cannot be entered upon too 
soon. Yours truly, 

DANIEL R. NOYES. 

6 



(From Ex-Lieut. Governor A. E. Rice.) 

WiLLMAR, Minn., Jan, 23, 1908. 
Hon. C. C. Andrews, 

St. Paul, Minn. 
My Dear General: 

The necessity of reforestation under such a plan as you 
propose, or something similar, ought to be given serious consider- 
ation by every thinking person who has at heart the needs of the 
State and the welfare of its future generations. 

Sincerely yours, 

A. E. RICE. 



(From Mr. Robert A. Kirk.) 

St. Paul, Minn., Jan. 24, 1908. 

Gen. C. C. Andrews, 

St. Paul, Minn. 

Dear Sir: 

I have your valued favor of the 21st, enclosing statement 
of your plan of reforestation. 

I am sure that most thoughtful men are disposed to regard this 
subject as one of the most important subjects before our people. 
Already valuable time has been lost in getting to work on it, and 
it is to be hoped that our next legislature will take favorable 
action on it. I do not attempt to recommend any particular plan 
for this purpose. I have not given the matter careful attention, 
and am not qualified to express an opinion of the value of any 
plan under consideration. 

I feel deeply, however, that this work should be undertaken at 
the earliest day possible, and that it should be put into operation 
as soon as the large body of intelligent men who have been giving 
this subject careful consideration can unitedly work together in 
carrying out this object. 

It is a great work and deserves the most thoughtful considera- 
tion of all public spirited citizens. 

Yours truly, 

R. A. KIRK. 



(From Hon. W. P. Allen, former Senator from Cloquet District, 
and for many years Vice Pres. C. N. Nelson Lumber Company.) 
Gen. C. C. Andrews, 
Forestry Commissioner, 

St. Paul, Minn. 
Dear Sir: 

I have carefully read your circular offering a plan of refor- 
estation, to be submitted to the people of Minnesota through a 
constitutional amendment. 

With the general purpose of the proposed plan I am, as you 
know, heartily in sympathy, and I do not know of any one in the 
State better fitted by temperament and experience to work out 
the details than yourself. The adoption of some permanent sys- 
tem of scientific forestry by the State of Minnesota is, in my 
opinion, the only way to avert a disastrous famine in forest 
products in the near future, and, what is worse, a steady decrease 
in rainfall and the consequent lessening of agricultural production. 
No dependence can be put on private initiative and enterprise, 
even when encouraged by tax exemption or other subsidy. 

It is a work to be undertaken by the whole State, since its ulti- 
mate benefits accrue to the treeless portions of the State even 
more than to the regions included in the forested limits. 

Very truly yours, 

W. P. ALLEN. 

(From Mr. James J, Hill, Great Northern Railroad Company.) 

St. Paul, Minn., Jan 25, 1908. 
Mr. C. C. Andrews, 

Forestry Commissioner, 

St. Paul, Minnesota. 
Dear Sir: 

Acknowledging receipt of your favor of the 24th instant, I 
beg to say that I have'read your plan for reforestation of cut-over 
pine lands in this State, and find it well worthy of the best efforts 
of all the people in the State. Our forest, once a rich heritage, is 
rapidly disappearing. Except for the areas on the Pacific coast, 
the forests of the whole country will in twenty years be practically 
exhausted, and then we will be compelled to begin in earnest 
what you recommend now. 

Yours truly, 



(From Hon. Wm. B. Dean, Ex-Senator from Ramsey County.) 

Redlands, Calif., Jan. 26, 1908. 
My Dear General Andrews: 

Yours of the 20th instant, forwarded from St. Paul, is at hand. 
I know of nothing relating to the material interests of Minne- 
sota that should command the hearty support of our people more 
than the subject of reforestation. 

The plan proposed in the amendment to the Constitution seems 
practical and common sense. If it should ever be put into opera- 
tion, future generations will bless the wise men who devised it. I 
hope you will be successful in your efforts. 

Yours truly, 

WM. B. DEAN. 



(From Mr. Thos. Owens, Gen. Sup't. Duluth & Iron Range R. R.) 

Two Harbors, Minn., Jan. 27th, 1908. 
Mr. C. C. Andrews, 

Forestry Commissioner, 

St. Paul, Minn. 
Dear Sir: 

I am in receipt of your letter of the 24th inst. , with your 
plan of reforestation; and I assure you that I heartily concur in 
same. In fact, I am a strong believer in the fact that we should 
plant trees for the coming generation. Yours truly, 

THOS. OWENS. 



(From President Northrop, State University.) 

Minneapolis, Minn., Jan. 28, 1908. 
Hon. C. C. Andrews, 

St. Paul, Minn. 
Dear Sir: 

I have read with interest the plan of reforestation recom- 
mended by the Forestry Commissioner of Minnesota, and while I 
cannot go into a minute examination of the plan, I may say un- 
hesitatingly that the plan seems to me to be feasible and desirable. 
It is of the utmost importance that the land in Minnesota that is 
not adapted to agriculture should be restored to forests, if possi- 
ble; and I have faith in your knowledge of the subject and your 
wisdom that justifies me in approving your plan. 

Very truly yours 

CYRUS NORTHROP. 



(From Mr. Geo. Rupley of Duluth.) 

DuLUTH, Minn., Jan. 20th, 1908. 
Hon. C. C. Andrews, 

St. Paul, Minn. 
Dear Sir: 

I have your favor of the 28th instant enclosing copy of pro- 
posed constitutional amendment. 

I certainly approve of the plan of State forestry outlined there- 
in and trust there will be no unnecessary delay in its adoption. 

Very truly yours, 

GEORGE RUPLEY. 



(From Mr. J. W. Cooper, of Griggs, Cooper & Co., St. Paul.) 

St. Paul, Minn., Jan. 30, igo8. 
Mr. C. C. Andrews, 

Forestry Commissioner, 

State Capitol, City. 
Dear Sir: 

I have read with a good deal of interest the printed com- 
munication sent me in your favor of Jan. 28th. I have long 
thought that the State could well afford to spend sufficient means 
to eventually cover lands that are unfit for agriculture with timber 
of various kinds. I believe there is no question of more import- 
ance than the question of reforestation, and I regret so few people 
give the matter any thought. If it was possible to place before 
the people of Minnesota what reforestation means to future gene- 
rations, I have no doubt a large majority of the people would 
favor liberal use of public moneys for such a scheme. I assure 
you it will be my pleasure to do anything in my power to assist 
you in the matter. 

Yours very truly, 

J. W. COOPER. 

(From Mr. T. G. Walther of St. Paul.) 

St. Paul, Minn., Jan. 29, 1908. 
Gen. C. C. Andrews, 

St. Paul, Minn. 
Dear Sir: 

The subject of the restoration of our pine forests is very 
interesting to me. 

I fully believe that the United States ought to take hold of this 

10 



subject and carry it out to its fullest possibility, but it would also 
be a grand idea for the State of Minnesota. 

In this State we have many thousands of acres of land which is 
really waste and is only fit to raise pine trees, — in addition to 
that, the question of what the future generations will do if there 
is no pine is a very serious one. It is right that we who live at 
the present time should do all we can for the happiness and profit 
of the future, and I am very much in sympathy with your efforts to 
bring about the restoration of the forests. 

Of course, you know much more about the detail than I do, but I 
assure you that if my assistance can be of benefit to you at any time 
I will be very glad indeed to give you my help to the fullest extent. 

If a system of taxation is necessary, I will be very glad to put 
in my share, — in fact, anything that is done to restore our forests 
to the greatest possible extent will meet with my hearty approval. 
Yours truly, T. G. WALTHER. 

(From Hon. C. D. O'Brien.) 
Mr. C. C. Andrews, St. Paul, Minn., Jan. 30, 1908. 

Forestry Commissioner, 

St. Paul, Minn. 
Dear Sir: 

I am in receipt to-day of your favor of the 30th inst., enclos- 
ing your plan for the reforestation of this State. The matter can- 
not be commended too highly, and is one of lasting importance, 
I sincerely trust that your plan will be carried out. 

Sincerely yours, C. D. O'BRIEN, 



(From President C. H. Cooper, State Normal School, Mankato.) 

Mankato, Minn., January 30, 1908. 
General C. C. Andrews, 
Forestry Commissioner, 

St. Paul. Minn. 
Dear Sir: 

I am greatly interested in the effort that is being made for 
an amendment to our State Constitution, and the plan of reforesta- 
tion contained in the amendment submitted to me meets my 
approval. I believe that the State should in fairness to the com- 
ing generations do what it can to restore the forests that have been 
destroyed; no investment could yield greater returns. 

Very truly yours, C. H. COOPER. 

u 



(From Mr. Joseph McKibbin of St. Paul.) 

St. Paul, Minn., Feb. ist, 1908. 
Gen. C, C. Andrews, 

Forestry Commissioner, 

St. Paul, Minn, 
My Dear Sir: 

I have read your plan of reforestation with great interest, 
and while lacking the information to discuss it fully in all its de- 
tails, the plan as a whole has my hearty endorsement. 

Forestry is one of our greatest economic problems. It should 
especially command the attention of our more thoughtful citizens 
and legislators. When we are so resolved, we can extricate our- 
selves in a comparatively short time from most of our economic 
difficulties — but no amount of penitence and energetic reform can 
grow a pine forest in much less than a hundred years. 

Individuals will not engage to any extent in enterprises from 
which they must wait a century for returns. Reforestation is 
peculiarly the work of the State and the nation, and a vigorous 
and broadspread start should at once be made in Minnesota. 

Very truly yours, 

JOSEPH McKIBBIN. 



(From Professor Thomas Shaw, of St. Anthony Park, Minn. 

WiLLisTON, N. D., Feb. ist, 1908. 
Gen. C. C. Andrews, 

St. Paul, Minn, 
Dear Sir: 

Your letter of the 28th ult, and the circular inclosed have 
reached me here. I take the first spare moment to reply. I have 
read what you say in the circular headed "Plan of Reforestation 
Recommended by the Forestry Commissioner of Minnesota," and 
am in hearty accord with the same. Minnesota will not be true to 
herself nor to her future citizens unless steps are taken at the 
earliest possible moment looking to reforestation under govern- 
ment supervision. 

I am also in hearty accord with the proposition to ask for a 
Constitutional amendment on the general lines suggested by the 
Commissioner, but have not yet been able to give that study to 
this phase of the question which its importance demands 

Truly yours, 

THOMAS SHAW. 

12 



(From Hon. Daniel W. Lawler.) 

St. Paul, Minn., Feb. 3, 1908. 
Gen. C. C, Andrews, 
Forestry Commissioner, 

St, Paul, Minn. 
Dear General: 

I have carefully studied your plan of reforestation and your 
draft of the proposed Constitutional amendment to put it into 
effect, 

I believe that your plan is feasible and that the commencement 
of the work should be no longer delayed. During the past several 
years I have carefully read in the newspapers the accounts of your 
efforts for the preservation and renewal of our forests, and I 
believe that the people of the State are under great obligations to 
you for the intelligent and efficient work which you have done. 

Respectfully, 

D. W. LAWLER. 



(From J. W. Strong, President Emeritus, Carlton College, of 
of Northiield, Minn. 

Los Angeles, Calif., Feb. 4, 1908. 
Hon. C. C. Andrews, 

Forestry Commissioner, 

St. Paul, Minn, 
My Dear Sir: 

For many years I have been deeply interested in your 
earnest efforts to preserve the forests of Minnesota from needless 
waste — a waste far greater than most of our citizens appreciate. 
The importance of reforestation cannot be overestimated. The 
adoption of the Constitutional amendment suggested would, in 
time, accomplish what President Roosevelt so wisely calls "an im- 
perative business necessity." I sincerely hope your plan may be 
carried out at the earliest possible date. 
With personal regards. 

Very cordially yours 

jAS. W. STRONG. 



13 



(From Mr. L. W. Ayer, Experienced Woodsman and Timber 

Estimator.) 
Belle Prairie, Minn., Feb. 3, 1908, 
Gen. C. C. Andrews, 
Forestry Commissioner, 

St. Paul, Minnesota. 
Dear Sir: 

Your favor of the 1st inst., enclosing "Plan of Reforesta- 
tion," is before me. That this "Plan," or something equivalent 
thereto, is absolutely necessary to prevent the destruction of our 
entire timber resources in the near future, is evident to any one 
fully conversant with the facts; and I am glad to give it my un- 
qualified endorsement. 

Born and raised in the timber region of Minnesota and having 
followed the occupation of surveyor, cruiser and timber estimator 
for thirty-five years or more, my opportunities for observation 
have been perhaps as great as those of any person in the State. 

Truly yours, 

L. W. AYER. 



(From Ex-Governor Lucius F. Hubbard.) 

St. Paul, Minn., Feb. 6, 1908 
General C. C. Andrews, 

St. Paul, Minn. 
My Dear Sir: 

The proposition that Minnesota should adopt a definite 
policy for the protection and perpetuation of her forest products, 
such as would be provided by the Constitutional amendment you 
have suggested, is one of the important questions that ought to be 
pressed upon the attention of the people of the State. 

This is one of the vital questions of the moment, and much 
farther postponement of its serious consideration and practical 
action thereon, would be a neglect of duty that would be severely 
judged by generations to follow us. I believe that our people are 
now educated upon this subject to a point where a decided opinion 
in favor of substantial State aid for the reforestation of our denuded 
timber tracts would be secured if an opportunity was given for its 

expression. 

Very truly yours, 

L. F. HUBBARD. 

14 



(From Mr. Frank J. Waterous.) 
Gen. C. C. Andrews, St. Paul, Minn., Feb. 13, 1908. 

Forestry Commissioner, 

St. Paul, Minn. 
My Dear Sir: 

The proposed Constitutional amendment as recommended 
by you appears to me to be thoroughly practical and feasible, and 
I am satisfied that if the people of our State understood the situa- 
tion that the amendment would carry by an overwhelming 
majority. 

Is there not some way that a campaign of education can be 
inaugurated calling the people's attention to the importance of this 
matter? Yours sincerely, 

FRANK J. WATEROUS. 



(From Hon. J. R. Morley, Chairman House Committee on 
Forestry, Legislature, 1905.) 

Gen. C. C. Andrews, Owatonna, Minn., March 3, 1908. 

St. Paul, Minn. 

Dear Sir: 

I have read with much interest the Constitutional amend- 
ment proposed by you for presentation to the next Legislature. 
And I can assure you that I am very much pleased to see these 
steps taken toward reforesting the cut-over lands not fit for agri- 
culture. 

And I think the State should take the necessary steps at once 
to reforest these cut-over lands. It is common knowledge that 
our forests are fast becoming depleted and the average citizen is 
indifferent about it. But if the State does not interest itself in the 
matter of reforestation it will never be done. 

Such a system of reforestation as you propose would put Minne- 
sota in the front rank in this particular enterprise, as she has been 
in everything she undertakes. Let the people become once inter- 
ested in this matter and realize the benefit that will accrue to pos- 
terity, and your measure will become instantly popular. No time 
should be wasted, and I hope you will use every effort to get this 
matter before the people, to the end that public sentiment may 
crystallize and results may be got at the hands of the next legis- 
lature. Yours truly, 

J. K. MORLEY. 

15 



(From Mr. James E. McGee, of Hibbing, St. Louis County, 
Timber Cruiser and Surveyor for Thirty Years.) 

Hibbing, Minn., April 13, 1908. 
Mr. C. C. Andrews, 

Forestry Commissioner, 

St. Paul, Minn. 
My Dear Sir: 

In answer to your letter of February ist, 1908, will say that 
your plan of reforestation meets my approval; and also your pro- 
posed Constitutional amendment meets my approval. I have had 
thirty years' experience as timber cruiser, surveyor and logging 
superintendent in the forests of Northern Wisconsin and Minnesota. 

Yours truly, 

JAS. E. McGEE. 



TAX EXEMPTION TO PROMOTE FORESTRY. 

It is the opinion of some people that it would be good 
policy to encourage the production of timber by private 
parties by reducing the tax on land so used. In Minne- 
sota it would require an amendment to the Constitution 
to authorize a lower rate of tax for forest than for other 
land. If any such measure were adopted there would 
have to be conditions that on land receiving the benefit of 
low tax, forest should be maintained according to forestry 
principles. It would not do to leave the land in a wild 
state to take its chances for natural forest growth, because 
in such a condition it might be very many years before 
the whole of it would become well stocked with valuable 
timber. There would have to be conditions that all of 
the land not well stocked naturally should be planted with 
valuable trees at proper distance apart — say not more 
than about five feet apart when two or three years old; 
also that the assessor should in person annually visit the 
land and report in detail as to the manner in which forest 
was maintained. Besides, the State forestry authority 



16 



would have to keep informed as to the way in which forest 
was maintained on private land receiving the benefit of 
tax exemption or reduction. 

I believe the opinion which favors any such encourage- 
ment of private parties in forest production goes no further 
than to recommend that the land be taxed simply for its 
value as land, and that no tax be levied upon the timber 
until it is cut, and that the tax shall then be collected 
according to a fair value of the timber. 

I do not believe that public opinion would favor treating 
large tracts of private land nor land of large corporations 
in this way; but only about 40, possibly 80, acres owned 
by any one individual. 

If it should be found expedient, I would not object to 
the submission of an additional amendment to the Con- 
stitution of a clause in substance like the follov/ing, to 
form a part of and follow the amendment I have recom- 
mended for a tax levy of three-tenths of one mill on every 
dollar of taxable property, namely: 

To encourage the production of timber by private 
parties, the Legislature may provide that not exceeding 
80 acres of land belonging to any separate owner and 
used for the production of timber in a manner which the 
Legislature shall prescribe, shall be taxed only for its 
value as land; the timber to be exempt from tax until cut. 



17 



LIBRftRY OF CONGRESS 



003 063 370 2 9 



Conservation Resources 
Lie-Free® Type I 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



003 063 370 2 



